Francesca Palombini has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ace-oauth-params-13: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oauth-params/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for this document. A couple of minor comments below. Francesca 1. ----- better symmetric keys than a constrained client. The AS MUST verify that the client really is in possession of the corresponding key. Values of this parameter follow the syntax and FP: I think it would have been helpful to give some details about how this is done "by verifying the signature ..." or a reference to where this is described. 2. ----- parameters. An RS MUST reject a proof-of-possession using such a key. FP: Is any error message supposed to be sent in such a case? _______________________________________________ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
